1. DWI Lawyer Pearl River Arrest Circumstances and Charges
The defendant was operating a motor vehicle in the hamlet of Pearl River when law enforcement officers initiated a traffic stop.
The police alleged that the client drove a vehicle in the wrong direction on a designated one way street.
Following the stop, the officers requested that the client exit the vehicle to perform standardized field sobriety tests to determine impairment.
Traffic Stop and Field Investigation Challenges
Police personnel directed the client to perform two specific field sobriety tests on the roadside.
The officers noted alleged signs of intoxication and subsequently placed the client under arrest for processing.
During the chemical breath analysis administered at the station, the device recorded a blood alcohol content of 0.23 percent.
This reading is nearly three times the legal limit of 0.08 percent established by New York Vehicle and Traffic Law Section 1192. The high reading triggered an Aggravated Driving While Intoxicated charge under Section 1192 subdivision 2-a.
2. DWI Lawyer Pearl River Administrative License Proceedings
Parallel to the criminal prosecution in the local Justice Court, the Department of Motor Vehicles initiated administrative proceedings regarding the driving privileges of the client.
The state sought to revoke the license of the client for a period of two years based on the circumstances of the arrest and prior history.
Defense counsel appeared at the administrative hearing to contest the validity of the evidence supporting the revocation petition.
Successful Challenge to Certification Records
During the Department of Motor Vehicles hearing, counsel identified critical errors in the certification records for the breath test instrument.
The defense demonstrated that the certification for the toxilizer device was not properly drafted and failed to meet the strict evidentiary standards required for administrative reliance.
Consequently, the hearing officer ruled that the breath test evidence was inadmissible for the purpose of the hearing.
The Department of Motor Vehicles dismissed the petition to revoke the license of the client, preserving the driving privileges against the two year revocation request.
3. DWI Lawyer Pearl River Litigation Strategy and Defense
The defense strategy in the Justice Court focused on dismantling the two main pillars of the prosecution case which were the field sobriety tests and the chemical breath test results.
Counsel argued that the observations made by the police did not accurately reflect the physical condition of the client due to external factors unrelated to alcohol consumption.
Medical Evidence Impacting Field Sobriety Tests
Defense counsel presented evidence that the client suffered from a significant laceration on the foot at the time of the arrest.
This severe injury materially affected the balance and stability of the client during the field sobriety tests.
The defense argued that the police failed to conduct a complete battery of tests to rule out other possible causes for the performance issues of the client.
By highlighting the physical trauma, counsel created reasonable doubt regarding whether the observed lack of coordination resulted from intoxication or the existing medical injury.
Exclusion of Chemical Breath Analysis Results
A critical component of the defense involved a motion to suppress the 0.23 percent blood alcohol content result.
New York Vehicle and Traffic Law requires that chemical analysis of breath be conducted using equipment that is properly calibrated and certified.
Counsel exposed errors in the certification records maintained by the state for the specific device used in this case.
The court determined that the state could not verify the accuracy of the 0.23 result when the certification records contained reflective errors.
As a result, the chemical test evidence was excluded from the trial.
4. DWI Lawyer Pearl River Case Resolution and Verdict
The exclusion of the chemical breath test and the impeachment of the field sobriety test results significantly weakened the case presented by the prosecution.
The defense successfully argued that the remaining evidence was insufficient to meet the burden of proof required for a criminal conviction.
Impact of Evidentiary Suppression on Outcome
Without the scientific evidence of the high blood alcohol content and with the physical coordination tests compromised by the medical injury of the client, the prosecution could not establish intoxication beyond a reasonable doubt.
The suppression of the breathalyzer result removed the Aggravated Driving While Intoxicated charge from consideration.
The strategic attack on the procedural and foundational errors committed by law enforcement resulted in a favorable disposition for the client, avoiding the severe consequences associated with a second offense felony DWI conviction.
19 Feb, 2026
